Adapting to MS
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| nmset Feb 02, 2013 5:33 AM EDT |
and MS will lead the dance. This PC is built for Windows, don't care about it. This PC is built for anything, let's consider it. That's the right way. |
| linuxwriter Feb 04, 2013 1:53 AM EDT |
What linux developers should be pushing for is a means of disabling secure boot on start-up. It's a Microsoft gimmick to control marketshare. |
| tracyanne Feb 04, 2013 2:02 AM EDT |
And... what Linux users should be doing is purchasing from Linux pre installers, like ZaReason, System 76, LinPC, Linux Certified, Emperor Linux etc etc. |
| BernardSwiss Feb 04, 2013 2:17 AM EDT |
Actually, it seems to me that: What Linux developers should be pushing for is a full user control over secure boot (including loading and managing multiple trusted keys) on the computer systems they own -- whether those systems are designated as "consumer" -oriented systems or not. (FTFY) ;-) |
| vagabondo Feb 04, 2013 4:29 AM EDT |
UEFI "secure boot" has little or no immediate impact on non-Microsoft OS users. It does have an effect on MS Windows8 users who want to do either of two things: 1) Use a "live CD/DVD" to grab screenshots, and then "write" an ersatz "review". 2) Multi-boot fo some reason. I think that it is a mistake for Linux/Unix distributions to involve Microsoft or any other proprietary entity as the source of ultimate trust in the boot process. I would prefer: 1) The tools and capability to create and use a self-signed certificate. This would enable organizations to make use of any advantages of "secure boot". 2) The ability of an independent trusted body (e.g. the Linux Foundation or FSF) to sign keys for distributors of binary boot loaders. Presumably any manufacturer that tried to limit acceptable keys to those provided by a single company would be inhibited by legislation. |
| linuxwriter Feb 04, 2013 9:43 AM EDT |
@tracyanne Buying from the vendors you cite is no guarantee of getting things that work properly. I bought a tablet from ZaReason last year and it is a dud. |
| CFWhitman Feb 04, 2013 10:58 AM EDT |
What's inherently wrong with "Secure Boot" as it stands is that it puts your system entirely in the hands of the vendors (mostly Microsoft at this point). That is not "security" for you; it's only security for them. Security for you puts you in control, not Microsoft. |
| notbob Feb 04, 2013 11:40 AM EDT |
SammyV wrote:I bought a tablet from ZaReason last year and it is a dud. Define "dud". Why a dud? Did you return it? If not, why not? If so, what outcome? You cast aspersions on a well known vendor and offer no explanation. That, sir, is not journalism --or even valid opinion-- it's inflammatory sh*t stirring! If you wanna be taken seriously in this group, get serious. |
| caitlyn Feb 04, 2013 11:55 AM EDT |
Quoting:1:02 AM EST And... what Linux users should be doing is purchasing from Linux pre installers, like ZaReason, System 76, LinPC, Linux Certified, Emperor Linux etc etc.You know, every time I consider a new system I look at all of the above. ZaReason and System 76, in particular, have excellent reputations. The problem is always price. They are way more expensive than buying from tier 1 vendors. I also want to see more of the mainstream vendors supporting Linux and, consequently, I've ended up with their Linux preloaded offerings whenever possible. Is supporting the boutique vendors worth the extra money? Perhaps it should be, but it can't be for me. While my income is way up since I came to Texas, between medical expenses, having to replace my car, and paying off old debts once and for all I find I am still on a tight budget. Price remains a primary consideration for me. I wish that wasn't so but it is. Quoting:What linux developers should be pushing for is a means of disabling secure boot on start-up. It's a Microsoft gimmick to control marketshare.Funny, when I said that early on I was accused of spreading FUD and misinformation. You're absolutely right, of course, and the added security is dubious at best. |
| Fettoosh Feb 04, 2013 1:14 PM EDT |
Quoting:Define "dud". Why a dud? Did you return it? If not, why not? If so, what outcome? .... Well said @nobob. I agree 100% on this. |
| tracyanne Feb 04, 2013 4:47 PM EDT |
@linuxwriterQuoting:Buying from the vendors you cite is no guarantee of getting things that work properly. I bought a tablet from ZaReason last year and it is a dud. You really need to qualify that. In what way was it a "dud", what did you do about it? what did they do about it? what was the final outcome? |
| jdixon Feb 04, 2013 4:59 PM EDT |
> You really need to qualify that. And I'm sure that since you mentioned it here, LXer would be willing to accept it as a submission if you wanted to do a complete writeup. They would probably even contact ZaReason for their response. |
| linuxwriter Feb 04, 2013 10:34 PM EDT |
@tracyanne and @jdixon: I have already begun collecting material for an article. I will post it here when it is complete. My initial review of the tablet went easy on the makers because a firmware update was promised to rectify the issues that I identified: http://www.itwire.com/reviews/mobile-devices/56626-a-tablet-... |
| jdixon Feb 05, 2013 5:30 AM EDT |
> I have already begun collecting material for an article. I will post it here when it is complete. I'll read it with interest. Thanks. |
| tracyanne Feb 05, 2013 5:34 AM EDT |
Hopefully it will be enlightening. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!